Hi Rolf,
> Unfortunately, there are already some 'third party' packages that depend > on jdom 2.0.1, and thus, people using the new jdom2 2.0.2 will have two > different versions of the same jar .... right? ... which is perhaps worse > than not having it at all ... ;-) > Since your goal is to allow JDOM 1.x and JDOM 2.x in the same JVM from a Maven project, publishing as org.jdom:jdom2:2.0.x seems like the way to go. You can continue publishing org.jdom:jdom:2.0.x as well; the duplication does not really cause any problems other than potential confusion. As long as you document why org.jdom:jdom2 exists, it seems fine to me. -Curtis On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 5:15 PM, Rolf Lear <j...@tuis.net> wrote: > Unfortunately, there are already some 'third party' packages that depend > on jdom 2.0.1, and thus, people using the new jdom2 2.0.2 will have two > different versions of the same jar .... right? ... which is perhaps worse > than not having it at all ... ;-) > > Rolf > > > On 28/05/2012 6:12 PM, Benson Margulies wrote: > >> Publish another copy with a '2' in the artifactId? >> >> On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 6:09 PM, Rolf Lear<j...@tuis.net> wrote: >> >>> Hi all. >>> >>> I maintain the JDOM project, and unfortunately it seems I made a 'novice' >>> error when deploying a new version of JDOM to maven-central. >>> >>> Thus, the situation is as follows: >>> http://search.maven.org/#**browse|-1946144149<http://search.maven.org/#browse%7C-1946144149> >>> >>> JDOM 2.x was released with a separate (new) package name for the express >>> purpose of allowing the user to run both JDOM 1.x and 2.x in the same >>> JVM. >>> This works fine for non-maven users, but maven users are not able to have >>> dependencies on both JDOM 1.1.3 and JDOM 2.0.1 simultaneously. >>> >>> So, I have already been 'criticized' for the fact that this situation >>> could >>> have been avoided by using a different artifact id for the new JDOM 2.x >>> releases... and I am not looking for more criticism... what I need is >>> some >>> insight as to what the correct procedure would be to do *now* to produce >>> the >>> best outcome. >>> >>> How do I best resolve this situation? >>> >>> Bear in mind that people use JDOM from all sorts of places... and JDOM >>> 1.x >>> versions are dependencies of many other 'third-party' maven projects. >>> >>> Rolf >>> >>> ------------------------------**------------------------------** >>> --------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >>> users-unsubscribe@maven.**apache.org<users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org >>> >>> >> ------------------------------**------------------------------**--------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >> users-unsubscribe@maven.**apache.org<users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org> >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org >> >> > > ------------------------------**------------------------------**--------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > users-unsubscribe@maven.**apache.org<users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org > >
